Some do not see the need for this work. Some argue that since our actions are not as horrifying as Al Qaeda's, we should not be concerned. When did Al Qaeda become any type of standard by which we measure the morality of the United States? We are America, and our actions should be held to a higher standard, the ideals expressed in documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.
Others argue that clear standards will limit the President's ability to wage the War on Terror. Since clear standards only limit interrogation techniques, it is reasonable for me to assume that supporters of this argument desire to use coercion to acquire information from detainees. This is morally inconsistent with the Constitution and justice in war. It is unacceptable.
Both of these arguments stem from the larger question, the most important question that this generation will answer. Do we sacrifice our ideals in order to preserve security? Terrorism inspires fear and suppresses ideals like freedom and individual rights. Overcoming the fear posed by terrorist threats is a tremendous test of our courage. Will we confront danger and adversity in order to preserve our ideals, or will our courage and commitment to individual rights wither at the prospect of sacrifice? My response is simple. If we abandon our ideals in the face of adversity and aggression, then those ideals were never really in our possession. I would rather die fighting than give up even the smallest part of the idea that is "America."
Frankly, my kinda guy, as much as Pat Tillman proved to be.
So logically, for deciding to whistleblow big time, he's being trashed -- and worse, it seems. Sullivan is, as far as I can tell, his most earnest defender -- which has its problems -- but cut through his usual to-the-max language and if what he's reporting is on the level, 'smear' understates:
Fishback has now been sequestered at Fort Bragg under orders restricting his contacts (the pretext is that he is a key witness in a criminal investigation and that he should not be in contact with outsiders while it continues). My sources tell me that he has been subjected to a series of long, arduous interrogations by CID investigators. Predictably, the CID guys are out to find just one thing: they want to know the identities of his two or three NCO corroborators. The CID folks are apparently indifferent to the accounts of wrongdoing - telling him repeatedly not to waste their time with his stories. Fishback knows if he gives their identities up, these folks will also be destroyed - so he's keeping his silence, so far. The investigators imply that he failed to report abuses, so he may be charged, or that he is peddling falsehoods and will be charged for that. They tell him his career in the Army is over. Meanwhile the peer pressure on him is enormous. I'm reliably told that he has been subjected to an unending stream of threats and acts of intimidation from fellow officers. He is accused of betraying the Army, and betraying his unit by bringing it into disrepute. His motives are challenged. He is accused of siding with the enemy and working for their cause. And it goes on and on.
What happens next is unknown -- but watch this space.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 15:58 (twenty years ago)
― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 16:06 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 16:09 (twenty years ago)
― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 16:10 (twenty years ago)
Big FUCKING LOSS!
I could not possibly be happier to be out of the military lately, holy shit.
― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 28 September 2005 16:11 (twenty years ago)
Judge Orders Release of Abu Ghraib Photos By LARRY NEUMEISTER, Associated Press Writer 2 hours, 47 minutes ago
NEW YORK - Saying the United States "does not surrender to blackmail," a judge ruled Thursday that pictures of detainee abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison must be released over government claims that they could damage America's image...
― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 29 September 2005 18:51 (twenty years ago)
― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 29 September 2005 19:14 (twenty years ago)
― Hughvr, Sunday, 2 October 2005 12:22 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 2 October 2005 12:26 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 2 October 2005 12:29 (twenty years ago)
― -rainbow bum- (-rainbow bum-), Sunday, 2 October 2005 17:13 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 5 October 2005 14:15 (twenty years ago)
― N_RQ, Wednesday, 5 October 2005 14:23 (twenty years ago)
― TOMBOT, Wednesday, 5 October 2005 14:45 (twenty years ago)
...It is simple and only takes 2 minutes. Tell the staffer who takes your call:
-I am calling to urge my Senator to vote YES on Sen. McCain's amendments tonight.-These amendments will ensure our troops will get the guidance they desperately need.-The Senator has a moral and legal obligation to ban cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.-These amendments will draw a much-needed line between appropriate interrogation techniques and the horrible abuses I've read about in the papers.
It is easy to make the call - and critical to ensuring success tonight.
Call now. Please don't delay. Your Senators are likely voting TONIGHT.
― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 5 October 2005 18:58 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 6 October 2005 02:27 (twenty years ago)
Here are the fuckheads who voted against this thing:
Allard (R-CO)Bond (R-MO)Coburn (R-OK)Cochran (R-MS)Cornyn (R-TX)Inhofe (R-OK)Roberts (R-KS)Sessions (R-AL)Stevens (R-AK)
And Corzine (D-NJ) didn't vote. WTF?
― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 6 October 2005 05:23 (twenty years ago)
― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 10 October 2005 14:35 (twenty years ago)
― _, Monday, 10 October 2005 19:43 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 10 October 2005 19:44 (twenty years ago)
― _, Monday, 10 October 2005 19:52 (twenty years ago)
― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Monday, 10 October 2005 19:55 (twenty years ago)
I can't back McCain completely for lots of reasons but for a lot of others the man talks and thinks sense.
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 10 October 2005 19:57 (twenty years ago)
― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Monday, 10 October 2005 19:58 (twenty years ago)
― _, Monday, 10 October 2005 20:02 (twenty years ago)
― _, Monday, 10 October 2005 20:05 (twenty years ago)
― kingfish neopolitan sundae (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 18 October 2005 17:19 (twenty years ago)
Also, White House finally caves, will accept McCain's amendment, and will probably make an official pronouncement later today.
― kingfish holiday travesty (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 15 December 2005 19:15 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 December 2005 19:28 (twenty years ago)
It's not going to fundamentally change anything. As long as we vigilantly look for torture, we will find it.
― don weiner (don weiner), Thursday, 15 December 2005 20:38 (twenty years ago)
― kingfish holiday travesty (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 15 December 2005 20:39 (twenty years ago)
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 December 2005 21:15 (twenty years ago)
― kingfish holiday travesty (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 5 January 2006 19:45 (twenty years ago)
― Allyzay must fight Zolton herself. (allyzay), Thursday, 5 January 2006 19:53 (twenty years ago)
― kingfish holiday travesty (kingfish 2.0), Thursday, 5 January 2006 19:59 (twenty years ago)